Women with alopecia harassed in woman's toilets at airport

[Christinapple]

https://x.com/lindSAYhanNAH3/status/1844696180887794159

I've said it several times, the gender critical movement harms all women. Any women who doesn't meet the criteria of what a woman "should look like" is at risk of being wrongly accused of being trans.

Also makes me wonder about that other thread about FWSSport. If a woman with alopecia plays sport with other women are people who are gender critical going to mistake her as a man and report her to FWSSport who will store data on her?

It's hardly surprising that you've met more GC women than TW. Given that women are half of the population and many are gender critical (and many more hold at least some GC views), while TW are a small percentage from male population.

Why do you put the preferences of a small percentage of males over the big proportion of females, especially when it comes to female space?

Ok, you don't understand the issue with toilets. What about communal showers, do you understand why TW don't belong there?

Thing is, it's not really just about the toilets is it? And if you're going to pull out the tired old 'They just want to pee ... nobody sees anything in a cubicle' argument, well they can do the same 'all in the privacy of a cubicle' in the Men's, can't they?

We have good reasons for having separate male and female facilities in the first place. Those reasons still exist.

For example, are there any court cases of women hiding cameras in toilets or changing rooms?

So called gender criticals with their policing and scrutinising women's appearances are far more of a concern to me than people who are trans.

I don't think you have the slightest idea of what being gender critical is, if this is what you bélieve.

You must spend more time on KF than I do on here!

Do you have your own thread?

The point of being critical of genderism (or a gender atheist) (or a realist), all of which get abbreviated as GC is believing that women are women and that they can have any appearance they want, clothes, hair, anything goes. No scrutiny, no policing.

Being saddened that some of them think they have to identify as transmen in order to have choices around presentation and ambitions comes from that.

Being angered at people with commercial interests pushing women into drugging themselves or getting unnecessary surgery is the next level.

Well, your concern is misplaced. It should be the males who are accessing women’s safe spaces under the guise of being trans that are of concern to you, as they are bigger, stronger, have a penis and bad intentions.

I don’t see how a pissed-off woman could hurt you in any real way at all.

I feel as if something like this needs to be a pinned post at the top of fwr.

It's brilliant that people with a multitude different opinions feel welcome to discuss shit here. However it gets boring when posters persist with the notion that there is only a binary choice between religious conservative gender stereotypes (match your personality and presentation to your sex) and post modern trans gender stereotypes ("change your sex" to match your personality or presentation).

It ought to be possible to discuss and disagree without misrepresenting feminists or assuming we think the choice is binary, just because you do.

We are not the USA! Feminists critique BOTH forms of gender stereotypes and reject the idea that either are inherent.

If you think women should have long hair then I’m not sure how you can be gender critical. Calling people TERFs and GC who do anything out of line is just a way to discredit relevant viewpoints.

I’m not sure if this is genuine but I’m sure at some point regardless of time period you’ve had some ignorant woman harass some woman with a bald head.

Has anyone on this board said they think women 'ought to' have long hair? A very odd opinion for anyone not suffering from mental illness to hold.

People are confused. At one time it was perfectly clear what a woman was, and that it had nothing whatsoever to do with hair. Or clothes. Or feelings. Or behaviour. Or whether it was your preference. You were a woman because of your biology and we all knew where we stood. Yes, the odd error may occur when people made assumptions and didn't look closely, but all easily resolved. Unfortunately we are now encouraged to accept that being a woman is an identity open to all and that we should look for other means to tell if someone has assumed this identity, including their pronouns, name, behaviour and physical presentation. The latter giving rise to much confusion. As how does one 'present' as a woman if not through demonstrations of stereotypical femininity? It's not GC people who have caused this confusion, it's the shifting of the goal posts to define 'woman' based on factors other than biology that has resulted in the doubts in peoples minds about whether a person who doesn't present as a stereotypical woman is a woman.

So genderism is the problem. Not those of us who reject or criticise genderism.

I was using the stereotypical hairstyle as an example. The woman in the post reacted badly to a bald woman which suggests she expects women to have certain hair styles so she doesn’t sound GC. I could have worded it clearer.

I don’t see how a pissed-off woman could hurt you in any real way at all

Yes, because all women are all fluffy and lovely and "made of sugar and spice and all things nice." 🙄
Hate this old fashioned attitude, this thread is about being confronted, just because they're female doesn't mean it can't ever get aggressive!

I'd rather have to tell an aggressive woman that I wasn't a man than have an aggressive man trying to tell me that he was a woman.

Woman are definitely not sugar and spice and all things nice.
However, in a fight with a woman I have a bigger chance of not being beaten to death; she's less likely to attack me as women are, by a huge margin, less violent and less criminal; she can't rape me; and her rights are not unfairly upheld by the patriarchy, so we are on more of an even footing in the justice system.

Aw.

shame we can’t hand wave away Darwin’s theory of evolution and substitute it with rainbows and unicorns, eh?

🌈🦄💩

Yes, this.

Of course women can get aggressive and violent. However, in a situation where a woman is pissed off because she thinks a man is invading her space, once she realises she’s wrong, she’s going to apologise.

If she’s right…I don’t fancy her chances.

I know this thread is dormant now, but I cane across this 2021 thread ( https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4400270-To-be-fed-up-with-people-misgendering-DP-not-trans?page=16&reply=112462782 )
and it's interesting that so many people are telling the OP that she should put up w her female DP being taken for a man constantly, just bc the DP has short hair & wears Seasalt hoodies and DMs. Many say they mis-sex women due to height, hair etc.. It seems odd to me. I suppose maybe it depends on what the women you mix w are generally like?
It's also telling that some suggest they'd assume the DP is a feminine man rather than a masculine woman if they weren't sure. Yes more women have male partners, but feminine men are less common than masculine women.. I think it's a bit telling of the 'don't offend men' ethos that's at the heart of TWAW